User menu

Utility Nav

User menu

News

Worldview Weekend

The World's Premier Biblical Worldview, Web-Based, Radio, and Television Network.
Help Us Spread The Word

Try Worldviewpedia Search

Signup and become a member today.

How Social Engineers Achieve Group Consensus

How Social Engineers Achieve Group Consensus


By Brannon Howse


Click here to order Brannon's new hardcover book Religious Trojan Horse (488 pages) or to download the Ebook.


 


Click here to join the more than 14,000 on Brannon's Facebook page


 


Standing in the way of group consensus has become one of the hallmarks of intolerance in today's postmodern world. Many change agents use a sinister methodology to insure its infiltration into groups, churches, schools, city councils, or wherever it is used. Called the Delphi Technique, I have personally witnessed its effect on a large group of parents at a school board meeting. It's not a pretty sight if you recognize what is happening. You realize that the group is being played as stupid-easily controlled and manipulated. The sad fact is, I saw it work well on an innocent group of parents.


 


The Delphi Technique is a physiological manipulation to achieve acceptance of a desired, predetermined outcome by a group of "change agents" or "facilitators." Often the process starts in a meeting with the entire group. The ground rules are laid as to how participants will be asked for ideas and opinions. The facilitators also explain how to work as a group, be open-minded, and not dominate the discussion. Then the large group is divided into smaller, more controllable groups with each led by a pre-selected facilitator who manipulates the group to accept the predetermined conclusion, goal, plan, agenda, or outcome. The goal in the small group setting is to implement the Hegelian dialectic process of having two opposing ideas conflict so the group can be moved to the desired third option. Once everyone has gotten there, the group is praised for being "productive" and achieving consensus.


 


Those who oppose the predetermined outcome-the third option-are controlled by being told they are not showing proper respect for their fellow group participants by listening, dialoguing, and  understanding the views of others. If the dissenter continues to object, he or she is made to feel like an extremist or that the person is monopolizing the discussion. I have even heard facilitators put a dissenter "in his place" by pointing out that going against a group of educators, business people, elected officials, and citizens who have invested many hours to bring the community plan together is arrogant.


 


The truth is, the "plan"-whether an educational, environmental, or sustainable development agenda-was not written by the public. While local people are made to think they helped draft the "local" plan, other "local" plans examined side by side from all across the country look almost identical. The reason is the lead organization behind it all has already given local "change agents" a template for how their plan should read.


 


The federal government did this during the implementation of the federal education agenda Goals 2000 during the Clinton Administration. The federal Department of Education sent an education plan to every state department of education and told them what their final state education plan must look like if they hoped to receive federal funds.


 


Thus all the local, parent, teacher and school board meetings held across the state were simply a show to make parents and taxpayers believe they had written their local education plan to become part of their state education plan. However, every state education plan throughout the nation was almost identical, including the outcomes children were expected to achieve. This is why such outcomes as "productive group participant," "understands positive health habits," understands diversity," "self-directed leader," involved citizen," and other such outcomes appeared in almost every state education plan submitted to the federal government.

The Education Reporter newspaper warns parents and taxpayers about the Delphi Technique: 


 


The facilitator begins by working the crowd to establish a good-guy-bad-guy scenario. Anyone disagreeing with the facilitator must be made to appear as the bad guy, with the facilitator appearing as the good guy. To accomplish this, the facilitator seeks out those who disagree and makes them look foolish, inept, or aggressive, which sends a clear message to the rest of the audience that, if they don't want the same treatment, they must keep quiet. When the opposition has been identified and alienated, the facilitator becomes the good guy-a friend-and the agenda and direction of the meeting are established without the audience ever realizing what has happened.


Next, the attendees are broken up into smaller groups of seven or eight people. Each group has its own facilitator. The group facilitators steer participants to discuss preset issues, employing the same tactics as the lead facilitator.






 


Participants are encouraged to put their ideas and disagreements on paper, with the results to be compiled later. Who does the compiling? If you ask participants, you typically hear: "Those running the meeting compiled the results." Oh-h! The next question is: "How do you know that what you wrote on your sheet of paper was incorporated into the final outcome?" The typical answer is: "Well, I've wondered about that, because what I wrote doesn't seem to be reflected. I guess my views were in the minority."


That is the crux of the situation. If 50 people write down their ideas individually, to be compiled later into a final outcome, no one knows what anyone else has written. That the final outcome of such a meeting reflects anyone's input at all is highly questionable, and the same holds true when the facilitator records the group's comments on paper. But participants in these types of meetings usually don't question the process.[1]


Believe or not, this process is even used in some churches and church denomination meetings.


 


So how do you confront the Delphi Technique? First, you need to let your conservative friends know about it so they can recognize it in action. Second, when in a meeting where it is being used, never lose your temper or get angry or hostile. Stay calm, professional, and ask questions instead of making statements. If the "facilitator" will not answer your question after several minutes of spinning, then simply ask your question again and keep politely asking it until it is answered or until the group sees the facilitator is hiding something.


 


The Delphi Technique is dishonest and based on lying to people. No surprise here, that once again we see that every issue is a spiritual issue. Delphi is used in the spiritual battle by those who embrace evil and are committed to an anti-Biblical worldview. Satan himself is the father of lies so we should not be shocked that those who do his bidding likewise use lies and deceit.


 








[1] Lynn Stuter, "Using the Delphi Technique to Achieve Concensus," Education Reporter, November 1998.